ArticleBMC medical genomics2026
Quantifying the utility of type 2 diabetes polygenic risk score for predicting incident diabetes: an analysis of large US-based cohort studies.
Article in BMC medical genomics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenome-wide association analyses (GWASs) have identified numerous genetic variants associated with type 2 diabetes, but the utility of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) derived from these associations for predicting future incident diabetes remains uncertain. We analyzed utility of PRSs to predict incident diabetes in longitudinal studies, consisting of African Americans (AfrAm) and European Americans (EurAm) from the publicly available dbGAP resource.
methodsData consisted of 3,886 AfrAm and 17,345 EurAm with GWAS data, who were initially without diabetes; there were 688 incident diabetes cases in AfrAm and 2,304 in EurAm. Strength of association was assesed by the hazard ratio (HR), while ability to discriminate between those who did and did not develop diabetes was assessed by change in the C statistic (ΔC), and ability to correctly reclassify diabetes risk was assessed by the net reclassficiation information (NRI). Decision curve analysis was used to model potential benefits of using the PRS to select individuals for a preventive intevention across a range of thresholds for implementation.
resultsAmong the 8 PRSs evaluated, PGS002308 (1.2 M variants, from a multi-ancestry GWAS) provided the best performance. With adjustment for age, sex, parental history of diabetes, body mass index (BMI) and fasting glucose levels, the HR was 1.50 per 5000 risk alleles (95% confidence interval, 1.41-1.60). The NRI was 0.313 (0.229-0.397) and ΔC was 0.010 (0.007-0.014). In comparison, NRI was 0.401 (0.338-0.464) for BMI and 0.257 (0.188-0.327) for serum lipid levels. The PRS provided a 5.9% (1.6-10.4) improvement in area under the decision curve. For most measures of predictive utility there was little heterogeneity between AfrAm and EurAm. In contrast, measures of predictive utility were stronger in younger, than in older, individuals.
conclusionsPRSs for type 2 diabetes, as currently constructed, provide utility for clinical prevention purposes that is similar to that provided by commonly used clinical predictors; utility is likely greater in younger than in older individuals. Further studies of diabetes risk assessment and those that aim to determine optimal target populations for diabetes prevention efforts would be strengthened by incorporating PRSs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.